Finally Hockeystick secret science emails to be released

The Hockeystick graph rewrote history and was used to justify billions of dollars of expenditure. The people who created it were public servants dedicated to science and writing businesslike emails to each other — which is why they fought tooth and nail and with hundreds of thousands of dollars for 1,763 days to stop you reading them.

Marvel that after 1,000 years of working as thermometers, trees suddenly decalibrated in 1961 just as our national networks of adjistimongered-thermometers were established. See that red line rise…

One thousand seven hundred and sixty-three days ago, on behalf of its client, the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic, PLLC (FME Law) asked the University of Arizona to hand over public records that would expose to the world the genesis of what some consider the most influential scientific publication of that decade – the Mann-Bradley-Hughes temperature reconstruction that looks like a hockey stick.

The University refused. …

“This decision by the Appellate Court is much more than a small procedural action,” said Dr. David Schnare, the member-manager of the Free Market Environmental Law Clinic, PLLC, who is prosecuting this case. “We asked for the full history of the hockey stick graph and much more. We sought the history of the fourth Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Report and the discussions among the scientists as they discussed climate papers and the then burgeoning antagonism between climate scientists not of like mind.” Chaim Mandelbaum, Executive Director of FME Law explains, “This case is not over, but we appear to be at the beginning of the end.”

Dr. Schnare described the status of this case and its importance. “We did not take this case only to obtain the history of a very controversial period of time in the climate wars. We also took this case to cast sunlight on how public universities work, how they contribute to the formation of public policy, and how professors behave within the policy arena. Core legal issues remain before the court – particularly about how to protect the research process while still allowing the public to learn how this sector of the government works. The University’s appellate brief is due on July 30th, our answering brief is due on September 7th and any reply from the University comes after that. We won’t have a final appeals court decision on the merits of this case until late in the year, and then it will be on to the Arizona Supreme Court.”

In the meantime, the documents will have to be handed over. Dr. Schnare and his staff will take the first look at those documents. With a doctorate in environmental management and decades of experience in policy formation, he, with the assistance of FME Law staff, will sort these documents, organize them for use by the public and prepare a report on what they contain – so to speak, a chronical of that historic time, based not on cherry picked emails but on the full history as available in the public record. They will then turn over the public records and their report to their client who is expected to make them available to the public.

FME Law is a 501(c)(3) public charity dedicated to be an honest, pro-environmental legal presence that represents clients seeking to hold state and federal governments to the ethical and legal requirements that protect and enhance free market environmentalism. For further information, Contact Chaim Mandelbaum (703) 577-9973, Executive Director of FME Law; or, Dr. Schnare (571) 243-7975, Member-Manager of FME Law, PLLC.

151 comments to Finally Hockeystick secret science emails to be released

As has been mentioned further down the post, I do wonder whether all will be released. It’s amazing what can and cannot be found, or is mislaid when you want it to be.
One only has to look at the ongoing FBI investigation in America to understand that.

What I am waiting for are the tricks of nature that Mike will have to pull if he is to hide the decline of his and all the other CAGWarmista Clown’s reputations let lone those of all the gormless sheep that went along with the whole thing.

The “decline” referred to a loss of correspondence between real-world temperatures and a proxy when it was checked against them.
Numerous academic reviews found there was absolutely zero worth to the deliberate misinterpretation of these words by a non-science community pushing a political barrow.
And of course almost 30 subsequent reconstructions, some using Mann’s methods, some using his data, but most using different methods and different data have all proven that Mann’s work was sound.
Those are the facts, and if you were sceptical you’d know about them by now, seeing as you’ve had plenty of time to fact-check this narrative.

‘Phil Jones’s 16 Nov 1999 email to Bradley, Mann, Hughes, Briffa & Osborn, in which Jones wrote, “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

Remember comrade, lowering the past to raise the future is fraught with danger.

”The “decline” referred to a loss of correspondence between real-world temperatures and a proxy when it was checked against them.”
Sceptics are well aware the “decline” refers to the divergence between tree ring data and temperatures post 1960. We are also aware that this means tree rings were empirically proved to not be accurate thermometers. And we are fully aware that “Mike’s nature trick” was to use inappropriate graphical presentation to hide this decline behind a thick line over plot of temperatures derived from manipulated surface station data.

As to 30 further reconstructions verifying Mann’s pseudo-science, that is a garbage claim. Every subsequent “Hockey Stick” has been found to be based on flawed, unethical methodology. Mann’s next attempts involved using single tree (YAD-061) for the entire ‘blade” of his hockey stick. Next he tried hiding those Bristle-cone pines in “multiproxy” data. Marrcot tried redating sediment core tops. Gergis and Karoly tried to make an “Australian Hockey Stick” by discarding over 100 proxy records from the Australian mainland and using only non-continental proxies. They took three years and $300,000 of taxpayers money to produce their propaganda. They were shot down within 3 hours of publication.

Craig, you need to understand that no “Hockey Stick” graph will survive the scrutiny of sceptics. Mann blew it. In his first attempt he short centred data prior to PCA (principle component analysis). In the ClimateGate II emails we see his own GoreBull Warbling collogues describing his work as “crap”. AGW sceptics will always find the trick behind any “Hockey Stick Graph”. Mann short centering data prior to PCA spoke to motive. Spoke? It shouted! AGW sceptics know every subsequent “Hockey Stick” is [snipped for legal reasons j]. Climastologists can never win at this game. Too many eyes are watching the “pea under the thimble”. And those eyes still include the piercing gaze of Steve MacIntyre.

But beyond hopeless attempts at defending Mann’s pseudo-science, you need to understand something bigger. It’s over. Because Trump. The death of the AGW conjecture is inevitable. It wasn’t about science, it wasn’t about protecting the environment. It was about power, control and money. Trump chose to withdraw from the Paris Accord, a process that will take years. He could have opted out of the UNFCCC, and invalidated all agreements based on it (including the Paris Accord) in just a year. He didn’t bother. He just ended all US payments into the “UN Green Climate Fund”. The US now joins the second two largest economies on the planet, not shackled to CO2 reduction targets and not paying a cent in into the “UN Green Climate Fund”. It’s all over bar the wailing.

almost 30 subsequent reconstructions, some using Mann’s methods, some using his data, but most using different methods and different data have all proven that Mann’s work was sound.

The reason that is not believable is because multi-proxy studies that don’t use tree rings do not find anything like a hockey-stick. If you use data that is different and separate from Mann’s data, but is still a tree ring, you could well end up with the same biased result that MBH99 had got. That isn’t necessarily realistic, and other diverse data sets got a different picture.

This gave a total of eighteen series with quite wide geographic coverage (including tropical) and based on multiple proxies. Many other series could not be used because they had too few dates within the 2000-year span or were not calibrated to temperature. In a few cases, data that were appropriate could not be obtained from authors. None of these types of data have the temperature calibration problems inherent in tree rings. Whatever temperature calibration issues exist with these proxies are not common across the different proxies.

The figure 3 in the original paper (end of that PDF) shows the robustness of the reconstruction method. Now look at the corrected temperature with error margins (Fig 2) in the updated corrected paper (nearer the top of that linked PDF) which goes only up to 1935.

The rise in 20th century world temperature was a gimme, it was totally predictable from the natural trend that preceded it.
The rise that would have to occur in the median of that proxy after 1935 would have to be more than 0.5°C to be clearly above the MWP. Even according to the much massaged HadSST3 the temp has not risen more than 0.4° since then.

We can argue all day about how much less the world would have warmed without human activity, but there is no point in arguing, as the Hockey Stick attempted, that modern temperatures were unprecedented. That stick was broken a decade ago.

Mann visually inspected data that supported the AGW hypothesis, and then applied “statistical analyses” that were only valid for a priori hypotheses proposed before the data were inspected, as described by Pearson and others. To do post-hoc analysis, you have to use much more restrictive procedures.

It’s not surprising to those of us who have done real scientific research, that if you are not an expert in a key tool that you want to utilize, you contact an expert and collaborate with him or her, and give him or her a coauthorship. Mann was not an expert statistician. Not one of MBH was a statistician.

In other words, this wasn’t a group of scientists using Student’s t-test or ANOVA, in which reasonable competence could be expected, this was amateurs who did not know how to use PCA, and therefore botched it.

Here is your intractable problem: MBH represented pseudo-science, really what Irving Langmuir called “pathological science”. But your position is that when subsequent scientists using valid methods tried to replicate MBH’s conclusions, Lo-and-Behold, they succeeded!

Good Science Verifies (the claims of) Bad Science!

If that was the way science worked, we wouldn’t have a fossil fuel CO2 Climate Change “crisis”. Why? Because our cars, homes and cities for the past 25 years would have been powered by Fleishman-Pons cold fusion reactors.

I hate to burst your reality-distortion field, but Michael Mann majored in physics at Berkeley. He was not recognized there as a high-potential student. Had he been, he would have been placed at Stanford, Harvard, MIT, Caltech, Princeton, or Berkeley: a university that had 15-20 NAS-Physics Section profs and several Nobel Laureates. Yale had then 4 NAS-Physics members (now down to 3), and ZERO Nobel-Physics laureates (in its entire history) on its faculty.

Then, after failing to earn his PhD, Mr. Mann did a “postdoctoral fellowship” at University of Massachusetts. (BTW, he never first-authored any papers in a frontline journal, with any Yale professor(s)). AFTER receiving acceptance of a UMass/U Arizona -faculty supported paper, by Nature, THEN Yale conferred upon him the previously-denied PhD.

In other words, a failed Yale non-degree-completer, lead-authored a paper in the world’s preeminent science journal, for work that was not done at Yale, and Yale conferred upon him a Yale degree! (Should they have titled it an honoris causa degree?

Finally, Mann spent 5 years earning a B.A. then 9 years earning a PhD, apparently attending school straight through. At the time, the standards were 4 years B.A., and 5 yrs PhD. So it only took him an extra 5 years. Not exactly one of the smarter or harder working young scientists of his generation. Or even average, apparently.

The decline after 1960 in tree ring proxy temperature was hidden by overlaying the thermometer-measured temperature curve with a thick red line that the CRU ‘scientists’ intended people to think was the tree ring proxy temperature curve correlating exactly with measured temperature….to ‘hide the decline’…..HIDDEN without giving an explanation of what was done…without admission of the fact that tree ring proxies had CEASED to correlate after 1960 …showing a decline where thermometer-measured temperatures rose….and could not therefore be seen as a reliable proxy for past temperatures as well as for the 1960 onwards temperatures.

That showed a mindset that was the antithesis of science…that had a preconceived result that had to be arrived at by any means available…even by deception.

The trees used for the tree ring proxies that produced the hockey stick were a very small sample.

Statistician Steve McIntyre searched a paleoclimate data archive to see if there were other tree ring cores from at or near the Yamal site that could have been used to increase the sample size. He found 34 up-to-date core samples, taken from living trees in Yamal by Schweingruber[Briffa team colleague]! ‘Had these been added to Briffa’s small group the 20th century would simply be flat. It would appear completely unexceptional compared to the rest of the millennium.’

And yet that sample that virtually showed only one tree ring proxy graph with a hockey stick curve… is what has been allowed by MSM to be used to justify this whole hoax…. which in reality is the latest Socialist attempt to install global Socialism….wealth redistribution…loss of sovereignty and existential damage for countries that succumb…especially Australia under Turnbull or Shorten…..Australia being more vulnerable than any other 1st world country because it lacks the alternative electricity sources eg huge run of the river hydro..nuclear…and/or interconnectors to neighbouring countries.WE ARE ALONE with our only electricity weather-dependent intermittents in Turnbull’s preferred outcome.

The world has been turned inside out…trillions wasted that could otherwise have helped an enormous number of people…the hoax of the millennium.

… the MSM will likely try to ignore it totally, pretending it didn’t happen.
Their excuses, none of them published, will be legion.
The editorial filter seems to similar to:

Is it predicting catastrophe?
No.
Is it about catastrophic warming?
No.
Is sea level rise going to flood the city?
No.
Is it a new heatwave and will hundreds die?
No.
Is it a HUGE hurricane that will hit land by a city? Will hundreds die? Be washed away? Be blown away?
No.
Has the Arctic melted?
No.
Are the Polar Bears going to drown?
No.
Has Antarctica melted?
No.

That’s NOT news; Spike it.

Whadda ya mean it’s about the Hockeystick?
So what?
Who cares about the Truth after all these years?

Nah. We don’t control the message. If the sun turned green no one would bat an eyelid because the stupid by design would would be placated by the evil by design. I hope this post appears where I inserted it. If not directed at #1.1.

Some heads need to roll, fur and feathers do not satisfy nearly enough.

I’m speaking figuratively of course, since we do not want actual heads on a platter but the jobs of those who, in their arrogance, abused their responsibility and need to lose their cushy jobs. And if crimes were committed then by all means some jail time will not hurt anything either.

Joe [Hockey] and Alexander Downer and the honey trap for Papadopoulos will be the next big news. Why did Alexander do it?
Donated Australia’s money to the Clintons, worked for an MI6 firm, set up the Trump fiction file.
Bad boy, Alexander, as Keating was wont to say.

Malcolm Turnbull and his little gang did it to please their mate Obama and jar up Mr Trump. The same reason he negotiated with Obama to send refugees from Manus to the US after the election. He and Obama thought it would be good sport to put the new president on the back foot and solve Malcolm’s refugee problem. I’m betting Turnbull got more than his ass chewed during THAT phone call, and that’s why he has towed the President’s line ever since, because he was warned and the Tarif threat was just a little frightener for Turnbull.

The creators of the now long “Broken Hockeystick Graph” will soon be snared by Dr Schnare, ie have their “secret science emails” released for public examination and no doubt their names will inevitably become MUD.

Craig: you can try as hard as you like as an apologist for the Hokey-Stick but it won’t work.

1. Steve McIntyre destroyed it and its dodgy statistics. His destruction and everything he worked out about it is published at his blog at his blog Climate Audit Mann made a schoolboy mistake in his mathematics. The ultimate evidence against your hero was when McIntyre tracked down the actual Colorado trees and took fresh cores from them to get an up-to-date analysis from them: “The Decline.” They proved to be terrible thermometers but very good precipitation meters.

2. The Climategate emails exposed interesting correspondence between the actors (The Team) about it’s less than accurate results. One of “The Team” pointed out how the paper’s algorithm preferentially produced a Hockey Stick when even Pink Noise was fed to it as data. Damning my boy, damning.

In print.
A copy can be mailed to you from Amazon.com for USD18.00 + postage. You need it to check your facts.

To quote from the publisher’s comments:
Andrew Montford’s The Hockey Stick Illusion is one of the best
science books in years. It exposes in delicious detail, datum
by datum, how a great scientific mistake of immense political
weight was perpetrated, defended and camouflaged by a scientific
establishment that should now be red with shame.

Bad luck Craig.

You have the right, unfortunately, to propagandize as much as you like. But the evidence is against you.

This would have huge impact on the Michael Mann lawsuit against Tim Ball, stuck in the County Court in Canada for more than a year. Mark Steyn in court for the last seven years. Michael Mann has a lot of balls in the air. They all seem to be his.

I doubt the judge’s finding about Ball’s lack of credibility is going to be impacted:

“The judge noted that Ball’s words “lack a sufficient air of credibility to make them believable and therefore potentially defamatory” and concluded that the “article is poorly written and does not advance credible arguments in favour of Dr. Ball’s theory about the corruption of climate science. Simply put, a reasonably thoughtful and informed person who reads the article is unlikely to place any stock in Dr. Ball’s views…”.”

You should be a little more skeptical yourself Craigy Boy, your graphs show ‘ups’ during the Little Ice Age and ‘downs’ during the Medieval Warm Period so for the minor warming since 1750 to have such dramatic graphical effect is inconsistent with your crap science.

Just as many climate ‘scientists’ have either sold their souls for ideological or other reasons with respect to this issue…or succumbed to the seductions of post-normal science –grant money and groupspeak…so have many eminent people like judges…Presidents and Prime Ministers…and Popes been sucked into the vortex of the hoax of the millennium for their own varied reasons…even willing to preside over the death of science…or of the death of confidence in its credibility anyway.

That’s why this hoax is so insidious…and why its purveyors should face a very heavy price for the destruction they wreak.

All statistics are dubious all the time. It used to be a mark of adulthood and education to know this.

A hot or cold day which is cloudy is not comparable to a hot or cold day which is clear. A clear or cloudy day can be hot or cold because of wind direction. An average achieved by lumping a clear day and night is not comparable to the exact same average achieved by lumping a cloudy and/or windy day and night. One is an apple, the other an orange.

If you are not applying interpretation guided by commonsense and experience to statistics you are reducing those statistics to a pile of snippable.

I was always fascinated by the observation (Perhaps Ian Plimer, perhaps Patrick Moore?) that Michael Mann’s analysis was done on a single tree. Can you really think to generalize the million climates of the planet from a single tree? Does anyone know if this is true?

As I recall, they missed the Big Heat of 1934 in their tree-mometer readings. Since it was the peak of the Dust Bowl it’s no surprise to an average punter that a tree ring grew pretty skinny that year. But who’d want to be an average punter when you can share an Oslo Emmie with Al Gorpone?

Seems they thought it must have been cold in 1934 because the connection between rain and tree-growth had not been established in the priest-ridden Dark Ages of the 1990s. They’re probably still wrestling with this threat to literal and mechanistic statistic reading, a popular all-indoor activity which is the foundation of New Science.

To be fair, NASA opined in 2014 that 1934 was possibly the driest year in the last thousand for N America – 30 percent more severe than the runner-up drought year of 1580! And these new-fangled mercury thermometers have indicated it was likely the hottest year for its century, just ahead of 1998. Not that it all means much, bare statistics being about as smart as a box of rocks.

Not exactly. Mann used tree ring data from two sources – the bristlecone pines in western North America and tree ring chronology from Arkansas. The Arkansas tree data was basically flat, and the hockey stick shape came from the Californian pines. However, his algorithm gave 390 times more weight to the Californian pines than the Arkansas trees, so the result was heavily biased to show the hockey stick shape.

In 1988 I was at a seminar given by a plant physiologist at a university in US. In discussion he mentioned that he had just had seen inside the latest and greatest climate model and he was horrified at how evapotranspiration was handled.

They had a model of one plant pore, the results of which were extrapolated to cover the rest of the world! Might have been room for some error/fudging there?

The model wasn’t mentioned by name but it has been pointed out since that Hansen’s was the only one then.

G’day again KK,
I’ve just read the WUWT link and reckon they’d better release those docs PDQ, else they’d be in (in Oz terminology) contempt of court, with some significant penalty possible. So I think I’m now a believer.
Cheers,
Dave B

“Methane and carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere continue to rise; Arctic ice is thinning and glaciers are melting; and weather is becoming more extreme. Will the jury come back in time?”

This sort of writing has a major logical flaw, the unproven and wrong assumption that “methane and carbon dioxide.. continue to rise” and this is man made. This is completely wrong. Not only can does man not increase CO2 levels, man cannot even alter CO2 levels. Further, if water warms, the gas comes out and 98% of all free CO2 is in the water.

Then to argue that warming the water means gas goes into the water, as with ‘acidification’ is factually wrong. This is like contradicting gravity.

The whole global warming story is that the ‘greenhouse gas’ CO2 warms the air by trapping heat. Why then how does the ocean surface get hotter without heating the air?

The fairytale of man made Global Warming is full of non sequiturs and contradictions and denial of elementary chemistry and physics. It is unbelievable that anyone gives it credence. Michael Mann has a lot of questions to answer, but at least he switched from an impossible PhD in physics to one in tree rings and world fame and financial success. He will need the money for lawyers.

Whats the odds that in the last 1700 days these emails (or a significant fraction of them, all the relevent stuff) have “lost”, deleted, shredded, bleachbit’ed (sp?), and all physical devices smashed with a hammer….

The Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) — which has never invested in an incineration project before — has indicated it is open to financing such schemes.

A spokeswoman for CEFC confirmed to the ABC that incineration was eligible for investment.

“There are modern energy from waste projects which employ best-practice combustion technology operating in Europe today that would potentially meet the CEFC’s criteria for investment, if deployed in Australia,” she said.

The confirmation of eligibility follows a letter sent by Energy and Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg to CEFC in April.

“I would like to encourage the board to consider further prioritising waste-to-energy projects, particularly those involving the avoidance of landfill,” the letter, sent in response to China’s decision to restrict importation of recyclable waste, reads.”

Also…….speaking of universities, I was talking to a work collegaue who has a relative facing a ( deliberately un-named ) very well know university for “disciplinary action”. From what he has conveyed so far, its like The Stasi meets Fawlty Towers meets Guantanamo Bay. This relative has been told to apologize without a describing what for, to a person who is able to investigate themselves, whom their original complaint was filed against…..

Its in the hands of lawyers.

It sounds like a Prima Facae case of systemic bastardization, and they are enlisting a very good lawyer to bust the universitys’ chops. They have decided to dig in and publicize it when its all over. One tactic was the unis lawyer to constantly contact their lawyer to drive up legal costs. I said best get the uni lawyer to contact him direct, to break that little nasty tactic.

Oops! The day of reckoning has arrived. Or will there be one more shoeshine job to put a golden face on the truth and make it into a nothingburger? July 4th reference for good measure…I’d rather have the hamburger.

I remember the so-called impartial and honest investigation into CRU that said, “Sorry folks, it was all someone’s imagination and there’s really nothing to see here so move on along like a good little skeptic.”

After all this time some enterprising young computer whizz kid could do magic and the emails will support the house, not those at the crap table. And even if they aren’t doctored up, will anything be done about it?

While I worked for an organisation that I cannot name we actually feed hard disks into a machine that did the paper shredding thing…but to everything. They had the input chute set up so you couldnt fall in. Thoughtful.

Peter Gutmann is a computer security researcher at Auckland University who did some of the early research into erasing data and recovering `erased’ data, from magnetic devices and from EEPROM (the basis of pen-drives). His paper from 1996 (!) Yes, it’s a bit old but still relevant because magnetic discs are still magnetic discs, is available here.
(I don’t need to ask him his opinion of Meltdown and Spectre … I can hear his laughter from here.)

Without a doubt data can be recovered from as many as 6 or more layers down. In other words, you can write over what you don’t want discovered at least that many times and with the right equipment your secret is still readable.

There is a U.S. Department of Defense standard for declassifying a disk that has held classified information and it calls for overwriting the disk a minimum of 10 passes using all zeros, all 1s, random numbers and simulated instructions from the instruction set of the machine the disk was used with. By then the pattern of magnetic reversals the read head will get back no longer contains any of your data.

There is an easier way, at least if you’re willing to destroy the disk. I recently rendered a disk I was going to discard completely unreadable, period. A few whacks with my ax gouged their way into the platter and that is the end of anyone’s ability to read it. By the way, the cases on these things are tough but perseverance wins through to the gold medal. You must make sure the platter is damaged, bent if possible or gouged, because if it can still be spun it can be put in another device and theoretically still read.

With the large capacity disks now available — I have one holding 3 terabytes — waiting for software to clean the disk sufficiently to be even moderately sure your secrets are safe will tire you out with boredom.

I have no idea what it takes to “erase” today’s solid state devices but if it’s non volatile I know for sure that whatever the technology it has some memory of prior content. Just like the magnetic disk there’s that thing called hysteresis to deal with.

Who will have a demagnetizer strong enough to do the job? I agree that you can do that but it renders the entire disk unusable because all the sector addresses are destroyed as well. I don’t know how strong a magnet is required but I do know it will take something fairly strong to do the trick. Back in my computer operator days I used to run tapes through the degausser and I did a little investigating by asking one of the on-site maintenance engineers what it took to do the job sufficiently for tapes that may have had classified data on them. He didn’t know for sure either but he said it would not do the job unless the tape was rotated over the magnet for about a minute. The device ran on 120V AC, so the flux reversals were important.

I would recommend the physical destruction of the disk platter. And as I said, it’s not an easy task. Most drives now come with a case requiring special tools to open, tools not sold to the general public in the local hardware store. So my ax trick would do it if I persevered but I couldn’t open the case. The ax suffered along with the drive but it was already dull so why worry?

Remember that on any operating system, delete simply marks the directory entry as deleted and returns the space occupied by the data to the free space. But the original data is still there as is the link from one block to the next. It may be made invisible to you but it’s all still there, at least for a while. So if you go back to that disk with something that can read the file names and if nothing overwrites the data, then you can easily read the whole file again. Numerous undelete programs are available and they are pretty good at discovering circular chains and chains that don’t agree with the length stated in the directory that would indicate part of the file being over written. So simple deletion will not protect you at all if say, you’re served with a search warrant and your devices are seized.

Windows is particularly annoying to me because it insists on keeping on using the disk blocks that were made free again as far in the past as possible, thereby making sure deleted files are recoverable for as long as possible.

Actual removal of everything you delete is a time intensive process that most users would not tolerate. I just settle for a 3 pass erase procedure and I do it instead of deleting files. That is sufficient security for your secrets that it will take some sophisticated equipment to recover what is deleted in this way.

And yes, I’ am that fanatical. The spying eye of everyone, even government is just waiting to browse your computer, including what you got rid of, especially what you got rid of, since those can be assumed to be the most juicy secrets.

This brings up a question: Some freeware called “Crap Cleaner” offers a service called ‘Wipe Free Space’ once you have downloaded the program. Now, again, it is free (as in FREE — – no charge for it to be on, and used by, your computer), and there is a version you can purchase.

When I’ve deleted (or backed-up) stuff that I won’t need, I try to keep space free on my disk; after I ‘delete’ it, and “Empty Trash”, I’ll have CC use it’s ‘Wipe Free Space’ on the hard drive. Yes, it can take several hours, but since it runs in the background, you can go on and do other things (write documents, surf Jo and Anthony, etc … ).

Your statements lead me to believe that ‘wiping’ does not remove all trace of the files I want (or need) off of my computer. Can you elaborate on this, Roy?

I’m not sure what your question is. But here’s my solution and remember, I don’t keep national security secrets like the recipe for thermal nuclear bombs so I don’t have to have something suitable for military use. I have a utility called Directory Snoop from an organization called, Brigs Softworks that will wipe out the contents on the free space and remove the file names, dates and other information in deleted file and directory directory entries. This is the URL if you’re interested, http://www.briggsoft.com/ I make no warranty of any kind and I know that it bombs when asked to work on one of the partitions on my 3TB disk.

For deleting files I have a file shred utility that I use to delete most files simply because I’m a fanatic. I got it so long ago I can’t remember when anymore. It came on a CD of utilities that were a come on for something. Again I make no warranty of any kind but it has worked for me for a long time. I have the installation file and I’ll send it to you through Jo if you want it or if you’ll let Jo send me your email address I’ll send it direct.

I have no idea if either of these will continue to work on Windows later than XP.

Let me know what you want to do. Neither one is very hard to understand and both claim to be able to meet the DoD standard if you call for it.

As far as I can tell both will completely overwrite the file or free space respectively. The unfortunate thing about the way operating systems work is that they simply mark a directory entry for a file or a subdirectory as deleted, leaving the teleale name and all the pointers to the data, the dates and the first 1,000 bytes of the data in the directory entry. That can reveal a lot even if the data is not recoverable. Dumb if you want security. Directory Snoop can get rid of all this leftover data.

There are many others by now and I haven’t kept track so let me know if you want what I have and I’ll send it.

Thinking about all this triggered another thought. I think there is another vulnerability and I can’t be sure about it. When deleted files go into the Windows Recycle Bin and they’re subsequently deleted permanently. That recycle bin in a system with stock Windows protections still in place will be inaccessible to anything wanting to wipe the space. Or at least it should be. And the Recycler directory will be hidden and possibly marked as a protected system directory, making it hard to get at.

I long ago broke the Windows protections I didn’t want to have in my way so I can no longer do the experiment to tell me if I’m right or not about the recycle bin. I just delete files with the shred utility and that does the job. Then run Directory Snoop to purge all the leftover details out of the Master File Table (MFT) daily.

You are right, but if it was so easy, why weren’t they shredded years ago?

Why spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to stop this request?

Is there a fear that known people have copies and destruction of these would hide nothing and be an admission of guilt, involvement, knowledge, complicity, approval? Are there secret injunctions in place, legal threats to stop publication, so this is about holding back the flood?

The flood which is coming is not the biblical flood from runaway, tipping point, end of the world Global Climate Warming but of emails admitting guilt, falsification of data, culpable editing, wilful ignorance and complicity in the biggest fr*ud the world has ever seen. This will not end in a whimper, but in a cataclysm.

I think we have a bug in the blogware. It seems to bite once comment numbers are somewhere after #30 or so. You click on a Reply and your reply ends up somewhere else. I have started starting my replies with the legend as above—Author, @ (at) #commentnumber— as a work around. Even though you click on the Reply link, your reply can end up almost anywhere in the sequence if the bug is activated. I notice ROM is doing it too. Observation suggests it comes on after 30 comments.

I had a play with the Flinders St post over the weekend and even managed to have a reply inserted before the comment I was replying to. See my reply to beththeserf @ #23.1.1.1 above.

There is a chance that someone quoting from a copy could be told, quite blatantly:

I didn’t write/say that. That’s a fake you created to discredit me. Check my records …

Why be honest when you can brazen it out?

(PS: Check the comment numbers below this: they might have rolled over. I had replied to your note (#41) to say which comment of mine this reply of yours was replying to (your comment #40.) While I was typing I saw the comment numbers below change to #1 (your #41) and my #41.1 had gone to #2. I wonder what they will be after posting this? ) This should be #40.1. but I’m picking it will be #41 and TdeF’s 41.1 will be #42 and what should have been my #41.1.1 will be #42 … here goes.

Back in 2010 Steve McIntyre who runs the Climate Audit site did what was an astoundingly forensic analysis on the gestation of the Mannian hockey stick whichh had so much influenxce at the time although no longer mentioned in polite climate science circles as it is now regarded as being little more than a piece of scientific chicanery geared to produce a specific political outcome with little reference to actual science.

McIntyre is a mathematician whose speciality is the independent analysis of oil reservoir structures and potential.
So he is very good indeed at working with only very limited data and coming up with results on which multi millions of dollars in expenditures and profits might rest.

Steve McIntyre drilled down into the available information on the gestation of the Hockey Hokey schtick and finally narrowed the data on which the Hockey Schtick rested to an archive of Arctic trees growing right on the furtherst north fringes of the tree line on the Yamal Peninsula which is located to the NNE of Moscow on the Arctic sea shores.

From this archive the CRU claque of hockey stick creators relied on the cores from 8 trees to show the rise in global temperartures over the last century. Note that they used the rather doubtful proposition that the tree growth was directly related to temperature and not to moisture availability or disease effects and etc.

Next here is the corresponding plot for the CRU 10. Without doing any sort of fancy statistical test, one can readily see a difference. None of the YAD** trees on the right are especially old – the graph shows their full history – all start after AD1800.
However, instead of the standard negative exponential declining growth, these particular trees started off very slowly, like old trees, and then got a burst of virility when they got to be 100 years old. Benjamin Button trees so to speak.
Because of the one size fits all RCS standardization, this post-100 growth pulse is divided by a small standard denominator – YAD06 reaches 8 sigma and is the most influential tree in the world. YAD06 does not always drink beer, but when it does, it drinks Dos Equis. Stay thirsty, my friends.
.
And That was the core of the data upon which Mann and the CRU claque of dubuious science perpetrators based the Hokey Schtick !
——————–
——————-

The second part of this whole “Climate Change” formerly “Global Warming” a term since abandoned as the Globe refused to keep on warming and went into a “Hiatus” which term itself supposedly implies that such a halt in the warming is only temporary, is the story of the “2 degree” target beyond which such rise of 2 degrees for the planet spells catastrophic consequences for the planet if exceeded.

In the eighth and last article in this Der Spiegel series “The invention of the two degree target” it gives the background to the invention of the “Two degree target, a temperature rise beyond which the effects on the planet will supposedly be catastrophic.
The Der Spiegel article shows just how close the claims surrounding the constantly promoted hype on not exceeding two degrees is to being a scientific F____ d of enormous consequences , possibly and arguably the most seriously f—- dulent piece of spurious science ever perpetrated on mankind by science and so called scientists and the Main Stream Media establishments .

To quote at some length from the eight article in Der Spiegel’s global warming series;
[ This article now has the ever disrupting demands for money to read it but if you get it online for a short period try to copy it to your desk top before the blankout ]

April 01, 2010 05:00 PM
Climate models involve some of the most demanding computations of any simulations, and only a handful of institutes worldwide have the necessary supercomputers. The computers must run at full capacity for months to work their way through the jungle of data produced by coupled differential equations.

All of this is much too complicated for politicians, who aren’t terribly interested in the details. They have little use for radiation budgets and ocean-atmosphere circulation models. Instead, they prefer simple targets.

For this reason a group of German scientists, yielding to political pressure, invented an easily digestible message in the mid-1990s: the two-degree target. To avoid even greater damage to human beings and nature, the scientists warned, the temperature on Earth could not be more than two degrees Celsius higher than it was before the beginning of industrialization.

It was a pretty audacious estimate. Nevertheless, the powers-that-be finally had a tangible number to work with. An amazing success story was about to begin.

Before the getting my first computer and getting onto the internet via the old dial up rural phone lines in the mid 1990′s I used to read encyclopedias such as Brittanica to while away the evening hours.

My daughter used to peruse and read and delve through Dictionaries for new words and just for the hell of it!

I have to be disciplined whenever I go to the dictionaries to look up a word. It’s a mind trap: I have three: a Concise Oxford (COD), a New Oxford Dictionary (NOD—a gift about 1995 and a large single volume with more words than the COD) and a Shorter Oxford (SOD two large volumes with even more words than the NOD). It can take me ages in the NOD and even longer in the SOD to find what I’m looking for: I keep spotting all these other interesting words on the way.

I bought the SOD and COD together just over a decade ago at a Christmas/New Year sale at Whitcoulls on a $5 per dictionary “spot special” when I was there. I had already spotted the COD and SOD in a big bin of assorted dictionaries at only slightly reduced prices and had moved on because they weren’t what I was there for. I didn’t want to try justifying $200 for them. A few minutes later I heard the “spot special:”

“$5 for a dictionary, any dictionary, for the next half hour.

I pounced. A COD and a SOD for ten bucks. Heaven will be like this!
Even better, Whitcoulls gave me a really heavy duty weather-proof plastic bag with handles to carry them off in. Eat yer hearts out all you out there who have to put up with flimsy paper bags!

I have never owned an encyclopedia and probably won’t for the very reason you’ve espoused: I would be forever reading it. Besides, they become out of date too quickly: it’s the Public Library’s job to keep those up to date. Yep, trips to the Public Library are usually lengthy and extended. I mean, there are all those interesting books there …

I salvaged from the family a set of children’s encyclopaedia’s printed in the late 60′s. My brother and I read the print off them when we were young. I’m letting them sit until I retire. Then I can peruse through them and marvel at how different the world is today, and how wrong many of their future dreams were. “Nuclear, the way of the future”.

Thanks Jo and my apologies for pushing the bounds of copyright which I should have noted when posting the long extract from Der Spiegel’s “Two degree Target” very illuminating history wise article.
.

Secondly by way of explanation, I had no idea when posting on Steve McIntyres characterisation that the core sample from the Tree [ Siberian Birch I think! ] identified as Briffa’s YAD-06 as the” Most Influential tree in the World” that within 24 hours later, WUWT would also [ currently ] post an article [ on Briffas death ] that would also include and quote Steve Mac’s characterisation of YAD-06 as the “Most Influential tree in the world.”

1) Almost any time I take a dead tree and cut it up for firewood (winters are cold in Wyoming), it is quite obvious that while the overall tree trunk tends towards a circular shape, the width of the rings vary within the very same ring, depending on which side of the tree you look at. If I were to take a core from one side, and a second core from a different side, I would “get” two different ‘temperature reconstructions’ from the exact same tree.

2) Over at Watts, I exchanged comments with a person who uses the handle, “Kristi Silbur”. She describes herself as an adherent to CAGW (or just AGW, I guess), and claims to be an ecologist. Through her discussions, we have found that she has degrees in Biology. With that in mind, I asked her in one thread, point blank, if trees are usable as thermometers. She answered in a single word: “No.”

In further discussions, it would seem that there are far too many factors affecting the width of an annual ring to discern a single parameter from the width. Such an undertaking would likely require a few centuries (and many thousands of trees) to form a calibration curve, before any such interpretation even becomes feasible.

Regards to all,

Vlad (a Most-est Deplorable-est crashing-est bore-est, and an even bigger-est bully-est, according to C.T.)

I thought this was all busted years ago. Goes to show they are wasting their time unless they can prove the deliberately fabricated the evidence. Even then so many would “so what?”. The only way to end this nonsense is for the scientists themselves to come clean. Don’t hold your breath. The other approach is to be proven in a court of law and sentenced to prison to set an example. After all that’s the procedure we follow in all other matters.

Sadly, it’s not illegal to produce a wrong peer reviewed research paper. And without the other scientists pulling the paper apart, and the publicist doing a retraction or publishing other papers refuting the original, it will stand as being authoritative.

I really like this section of the E&E Legal’s doc ( page 13 pf 18 ):
“While ABOR is not injured and thus cannot claim a hardship, E&E Legal’s failure to receive the documents in a timely fashion has caused hardship that is now heightened because of events now unfolding in Washington, D.C. E&E Legal has been an active participant in national and international debate over climate science and policy and the role of academic scientists in policy formation (including issues beyond climate science). E&E Legal argues from fact rather than supposition and uses historical records to support its arguments. The failure to obtain the records sought in this matter creates an insurmountable hardship on E&E Legal when discussing the utility of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) processes – processes discussed in detail in the withheld documents… ”

finally
I sincerely, truly hope that there is a bloodbath, a proper wild eyed lynch mob with torches and pitch forks, for the people that have knowingly, deliberately perpetuated this scam.
I can’t wait

The best description of all things wrong about grafting actual temperatures with a resolution of half a year onto the proxy data with resolution of tens to hundred years. Change Mann’s data to the same resolution turns his actual data to a single point on the end of tye tree ring data. Typical!

While, to a degree, we can see farther because we stand on the shoulders of giants, all too often the not so great stand on our shoulders to block our view. The great are great because they seek the truth and are transparent about their process and thoughts. The not so great seek only reputation and the unearned. They hide their process and thoughts for fear they will be found for what and who they are.

As it is with any theoretical science, theoretical climate science advances one funeral at a time. The entrenched vested interest, the not so great, must fade from the scene before the errors of the past can be corrected and the deeper truths be exposed.

I hate that graph in so many ways, but most of all because I hate graphs that draw a solid line through the middle of gray areas that represent uncertainty, as if the middle is always the actual temperature.

If the universities concerned, knowing the contents of the emails they refused to release, have benefited from the non-release of the information contained therin, then they should be prosecuted [snip] to the greatest extent possible, including prosecution of the executives individually.

The blog has been recently having problems keeping answers with the comment you’re replying to. It allocates your comment as a whole new one. I’ve been having problems with that the last few days. I’ve even had a comment inserted ahead of where I was commenting. I’m beginning to think it might be caused by two or more comments arriving simultaneously (probably more).

There was a time (sometime ago, can’t remember when) when two comments would occasionally be given the same sub-number. It was rare but I did see a couple of those. Maybe that “bug” was fixed and we’re being dealt to by the fix.

It might be an idea to start each comment as I have this one. I will be from now on.

whether they are released or not, is there any chance theirABC management will ever put a stop to this kind of rubbish?

4 Jul: ABC: Could cli-fi help inspire real climate change action?
RN By Monique Ross and Julie Street for Late Night Live
Climate fiction novels catapult readers into a future ravaged by the catastrophic effects of global warming.
Survival is a struggle amid dwindling food and water supplies, extreme weather and pandemics. Environmental emergencies are slowly unfolding: animals dying, forests vanishing, sea levels rising.
The genre — variously dubbed ‘cli-fi’, ‘slow apocalypse’ and Anthropocene fiction — has become a publishing phenomenon, with Margaret Atwood and Ian McEwan among those conjuring up dystopian near-futures.
“You could say it’s because it resonates with a culture on the verge of collapse,” says Australian author Alice Robinson, whose cli-fi novel Anchor Point was longlisted for the Stella Prize in 2016…

James Bradley, whose 2015 book Clade was one of the first Australian works to be hailed as cli-fi, says it’s easy to understand why many people struggle to make sense of the “incredibly difficult idea” of climate change.
“[Climate change] is huge, it spreads everywhere, it touches everything, it’s completely unbounded,” he says.
“It’s such a big problem that we either exist in a state of denial about it… or we go into this kind of blind panic and despair. And neither of those are useful responses.”…
“We’re looking at a metre, probably more, [of sea rise] by the end of the century. I actually can’t imagine what that means, and I don’t think we as a society can get to grips with that,” he says…
Once people can make sense of the issue, he says, they may feel empowered to take action — even in a small way — to fight global warming…

For readers feeling overwhelmed in the face of climate change, cli-fi also has an important message to deliver: one of hope…
(Alice Robinson) “There’s hope in that hopelessness somehow.”…
“The complication in that is I’m a parent; I have to remain hopeful against the odds because I’ve sent [my children] into the future by bringing them here,” she says…
“The scariest thing in climate change is that we won’t do anything; that we’ll just let it all unfold and collapse.”…http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-04/could-climate-change-fiction-help-save-the-world/9913990

3 Jul: Ontario: Office of The Premier News Release: Premier Doug Ford Announces the End of the Cap-and-Trade Carbon Tax Era in Ontario
Fulfilment of election promise is the first step toward reducing gas prices by 10 cents per litre.
TORONTO — Ontario Premier Doug Ford today confirmed that, as the first order of business of Ontario’s Government for the People, his cabinet revoked the regulation that punishes Ontario residents at the gas pump through a wasteful cap-and-trade carbon tax regime; this measure comes into effect July 3, 2018. In order to fulfill this election commitment, the Government of Ontario will immediately begin an orderly wind-down of all programs funded out of cap-and-trade carbon tax revenues.

“Every cent spent from the cap-and-trade slush fund is money that has been taken out of the pockets of Ontario families and businesses,” said Ford. “We believe that this money belongs back in the pockets of people. Cancelling the cap-and-trade carbon tax will result in lower prices at the gas pump, on your home heating bills and on virtually every other product that you buy.”

According to the Auditor General, who conducted an audit of the program, the cap-and-trade system could cost Ontario consumers and businesses $8 billion, with a negligible impact on the province’s carbon emissions.
“Cap-and-trade and carbon tax schemes are no more than government cash grabs that do nothing for the environment, while hitting people in the wallet in order to fund big government programs,” said Ford. “I promised that the party with taxpayers’ dollars was over and that this would include scrapping the cap-and-trade carbon tax slush fund. Today we are keeping that promise.”

To ensure an orderly wind-down of programs funded through the cap-and-trade carbon tax, Ford committed that his government will honour arrangements where contracts have already been signed and orders have already been made, such as energy efficient insulation and window retrofits…

4 Jul: Vatican News: Al Gore: Pope Francis a ‘moral force’ for solving climate crisis
Nobel Peace Prize Winner and former U.S. Vice President, Al Gore, is one of the world’s most vocal defenders of the environment. His 2007 documentary film, “An Inconvenient Truth”, won an Oscar and his Climate Reality Project recently hosted an important summit in Berlin. In this exclusive interview with Vatican News, Al Gore praises Pope Francis’ encyclical, “Laudato si”, and calls for a “Sustainability Revolution”.
By Alessandro Gisotti

Q: You are one the strongest voices in the world calling for environmental protection. Why are you so passionately involved in this “green battle” for our planet?

GORE: I believe that the purpose of life is to glorify God — and if we heap contempt and destruction on God’s creation, that is grotesquely inconsistent with the way we are supposed to be living our lives. Moreover, the climate crisis is now the biggest existential challenge humanity has ever faced. And it is not only humanity that is at risk; according to the world’s biologists, up to half of all the living species with which we share this Earth are in danger of extinction during this century. When Noah was instructed to gather two of every species in his ark in order to “keep them alive with thee,” I believe that instruction is also meant for us.

At present, we are using the thin shell of atmosphere surrounding our planet as an open sewer for 110 million tons of heat-trapping manmade global warming pollution every day. The accumulated total is now trapping as much extra heat energy as would be released by 400,000 Hiroshima-class uncle bombs exploding every 24 hours. The consequences of that extra heat energy are clear: Stronger storms, bigger downpours, more destructive floods and mudslides, deeper and longer droughts, crop failures, water scarcity in many regions, strengthening wildfires, spreading disease, melting ice, and sea level rise — along with the acidification of the world ocean, and more.

So, there is really no choice here. We have to solve the climate crisis. As Pope Francis has said, “if we destroy creation, creation will destroy us.”
I have been fortunate to be able to pour every ounce of energy I have into efforts to contribute to the solution to his(sic?) crisis. And I am so inspired by the millions of activists and leaders around the world who are driving clean energy development in the Sustainability Revolution. The real passion and energy are coming from these activists and leaders…

***about half a million Euros is all it takes to get Obama to Portugal – nothing political, though:

3 Jul: International Meetings Review: Portugal: Obama Heads Climate Change Conference in Porto
The 44th President of the United States will land in Portugal on Friday, to help companies handle environment issues.
Barack Obama will headline a major event in Porto, Portugal, the “Climate Change Leadership Porto”, which will focus on climate change and solutions to tackle this problem. The 44th President of the United States is giving a talk in the city’s Coliseu, on the 6th of July, in a highly anticipated speech, moderated by Advanced Leadership Foundation’s Juan Verde, called “A Conversation with Barack Obama: The impacts and challenges of climate changes in the World”…

The organisation is a partnership between several entities, including Taylor’s Port, Porto City Hall, Associação Comercial do Porto (a local trade association), Instituto da Vinha e do Vinho (an entity that oversees wine production), the American College in Spain, and also the Advanced Leadership Foundation, that was responsible for bringing Obama to the event. Many other companies have also joined as organisers or sponsors…

3 Jul: Irish Times: Government accused of ‘shaming’ Ireland on environment
Green Party leader says Ministers must stop playing election games and stay another year to deal with climate change
by Marie O’Halloran
Fine Gael and the Independent Ministers in Government have been accused of having “one of the worst environmental records” in Irish politics and of “shaming our country”.
Green party leader Eamon Ryan said Ireland’s reputation on environmental issues “is in the doghouse” and added “I am sorry for insulting dogs…

Mr Ryan said if the Government was thinking of the national interest, “it would stay the course for another year”, and bring in measures to deal with climate change, including legislation to ban any further oil and gas exploration and the Waste Reduction Bill…
The Dublin Bay South TD also hit out at civil servants who were still saying that “gas is good and we should be looking for more of our own oil”.
“That day is over.”…

Mr Ryan said the new committee should hold its first meeting next week, get its research in place, call in the expertise of the universities and then “bring in the seven key secretaries general, call them to account regarding what their Departments are going to do”…

‘No leprechaun’
Earlier, Independent TD Danny Healy-Rae, a climate change denier, said the committee would only be a talking shop, the Government would provide millions for climate change but it would be the farmers and workers who paid for it.
He said “the Minister has no leprechaun” with a pot of gold.

3 Jul: National Post Canada: Kelly McParland: The hypocrisy of faith-based environmentalism? Its preachers have failed to deliver
It’s hard to keep the flock under control if the high priests can’t be trusted
Jerry Brown was castigating the current resident of the White House the other day for his attitude towards climate change.
“I don’t think President Trump has a fear of the Lord, the fear of the wrath of God, which leads one to more humility,” scolded Brown.
Brown famously trained as a Jesuit priest, so his theological hyperbole is entirely in character. But it also underlines an aspect of climate doctrine that threatens the very message he hopes to deliver.

Environmentalists long ago turned to faith as a recruitment tool. It was far easier and more effective than trying to explain the science, which was neither simple nor straightforward, is troubled by inconsistencies and challenged by dissidents in any case. Critics could simply be dismissed as heretics and be done with it. In the old days doubters might have been banished or burned; in current society it’s enough to subject them to ridicule on late-night television and progressive social media sites. If you want to be one with the chosen people you have to accept the full canon of beliefs, and environmental purity is right at the top of the list.
But reliance on faith comes with a caveat. It rests heavily on the integrity of its clergy. It’s hard to keep the flock under control if the high priests can’t be trusted…

In Canada, the climate clergy hasn’t been delivering for quite some time now. Liberals did themselves absolutely no good whatsoever by loudly and regularly declaiming the firmness of their devotion to the United Nations’ climate agenda, and then publicly straying time and again. They did nothing about Kyoto other than sign on, failing to implement its conditions or keep to their promises. They sent an enormous delegation to Paris in 2016, largely to posture shamelessly and telegraph their virtue…READ ALLhttps://nationalpost.com/opinion/kelly-mcparland-justin-trudeau-carbon-tax-doug-ford#comments-area

Today ; ” Last updated at Thu Jul 5 00:31:46 UTC 2018 using 2190 observations from 00UTC” the record breaking temperatures for this same identical date and time in previous years and from around the world are summed up as ;

Unofficially, there are currently 4 stations that have broken their daily high record, 3 that are tying it, and 17 that are near it.
.
Unofficially, there are currently 3 stations that have broken their daily low record, 3 that are tying it, and 5 that are near it.
.

Tables of locations and current temperatures and the year the temperature records for this specific date were set are included.

I emphasis that these tempertures and records are for the current date and month of the year AND for the specific time slot ie; 3 hour or 6 hour intervals as per WMO used to take the temperature readings for that location.

So later in the same day when a new set of readings are taken around the world the data provided here will change even though it is still the same day .

“So IF their estimates are correct, and IF we got all the savings today, and IF CO2 actually were the secret temperature control knob for the planet … if all that were true, the total of all the projects funded by the GCF would cause a temperature reduction of … wait for it … 0.0015°C.

How small a temperature change is this? Well, if you walk up a flight of stairs, which is about ten feet (three metres) vertically, there is a temperature difference due to the change in altitude. How big a difference? Well, temperatures drop about one degree C for every hundred metres you go up in altitude. So in climbing a flight of stairs, you’d experience a temperature drop of about 0.03°C. Three-hundredths of one degree. Far too small to detect without special instruments.

But that’s still twenty times the possible temperature reduction from the $6.9 billion dollars wasted on these GCF mitigation projects, a reduction which was only 0.0015°C. So we’ve spent $6.9 billion dollars for a POSSIBLE decrease of about the temperature difference from the floor to half-way up to your knee … be still, my beating heart …”

Absolutely. It addressed the uncertainty stemming from the wide range of natural variation indicated by the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age by erasing them from existence. It reinforced the claimed correlation between temperature and co2 concentration. It established the assumption that the climate was/is stable until mankind influences it. Along with that assumption comes the assumption that mankind can control the climate through reducing co2 emissions. By erasing the LIA from existence it left as the intuitive explanation for the gradual rise of temps since the LIA as the Industrial Revolution, and established a “normal” temperature, at least in the minds of the casual observer, that is lower than current temps. It is what kids have been taught since a young age for two decades now. It has become the default null hypothesis within academia.

Defending it is now why the pause has also been erased from history, and why the historical and current temperature records have been continually tampered with right down to the present time.

The real beginnings of the global warming /climate change cult are usually given as Hansen’s presentation to the US Senate committee on June 23rd 1988.

The whole idea of CO2 being a warming gas that could increase global temperatures goes back as far as the 1930′s and 1950′s when Guy Callender began to postulate the warming effects of a rising percentage of atmospheric CO2 on the Earth’s temperature profile.

Ben Santer at this conference showed how a Hot Spot [ recently posted here again by Jo ] would form over the equator in the upper levels of the atmosphere which would be the major indicator of a global warming taking place.

No such hot spot has since ever been detected by balloons or satelites or any other means of measuring stratospheric temperatures .

Santer as the recorder for the Madrid conference also did another sleight of hand acting it is suspected under the instructions of Houghton of the UK and the American bureacrats in the State Department plus a whole raft of ethics and morality free NGO’s to change the key text in the Madrid conferences records from a maybe; Nevertheless, the balance of evidence now suggests that the global climate system is being affected by human activities. to a far more definite ; The balance of evidence points towards a human influence.

This change in wording and the much stronger emphasis on human influences on the cclimate was done without the knowlwedge of the Madrid conference participants who only learn’t of the wording and emphasis changes some weeks after the confernce was finished and they received the conference reports some weeks later.

Rather interesting and almost unknown even amongst historians is the [ unsubstantiated ] report that some 300 or more papers on the climate that universally rejected the human influence having a major impact on the climate then or into the future just dissapeared during this Madrid Conference and have never been seen since or their dissapearance explained despite the authors of those papers asking a lot of questions on the fate of their own papers.

And THAT change in wording begat the strengthing of the belief in a global warming created by increasing levels of CO2 and triggered the Tipping Point towards the cult like belief in an unproven in any way, ideologically driven belief in a catastrophic warming of the planet from the dreaded “carbon”, which the acolytes can’t even seem to spell Carbon Dioxide so have to use the simpler and grossly wrong term “Carbon” to justify their beliefs .

The IPCC under the UN’s format had been formed in and began to operate in November 1988.

The IPCC’s designated role is NOT to research the global climate but from its charter;

[ bolding mine ]

2. The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.
IPCC reports should be neutral with respect to policy, although they may need to deal objectively with scientific, technical and socio-economic factors relevant to the application of particular policies.

Mann’s Hockey stick. Hokey Schtick was created from the Briffa Tree core data plus some verges coring from a swamp in northen europe which McIntyre eventually worked out had been inverted so as to make it conform to the required data to show a rapid global increase in temperarture paralleling the rise in artmospheric CO2 plus a great deal of well hidden [ Climate Gate e-mails ] debasing of scientific data by the CRU team presided over by Phil Jones who has now retired and some very heavy thuggish behaviour by the hockey stick /CRU claque in having the editor of a major science magazine dismissed because he dared to doubt and questioned the truthfulness of the Hockey Stick and its data , data which as it turned out was apparently eaten by a dog somewhere as it was no longer obtainable.

The hockey stick became the cover icon for the IPCC’s Third Annual Report [ TAR ] in 2001 from which due to its apparent simplicity and understandability it became the basis for the cult like ideology that today almost solely underpins the close to fanatical behaviour of the acolytes of global warming / climate change.

3 Jul: ProjectSyndicate: Trump’s Psychopathology Is Getting Worse
by Jeffrey D. Sachs, Bandy X. Lee
(Jeffrey D. Sachs, Professor of Sustainable Development and Professor of Health Policy and Management at Columbia University, is Director of Columbia’s Center for Sustainable Development and of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network…
Bandy X. Lee is a forensic psychiatrist at Yale School of Medicine and a project leader for the World Health Organization)

Most pundits interpret the US president’s outbursts as playing to his political base, or preening for the cameras, or blustering for the sake of striking future deals. In fact, Trump suffers from several psychological pathologies that render him a clear and present danger to the world…
Trump shows signs of at least three dangerous traits: paranoia, lack of empathy, and sadism…
We believe that Trump has these traits. We base our conclusion on observations of his actions, his known life history, and many reports by others, rather than as the finding of an independent psychiatric examination, which we have previously called for, and call for again…

***The same is true of Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from a growing number of international agreements and bodies, including the Paris climate agreement…

30 Jun: Crux: Economist Sachs acts as pope’s cheerleader on ‘Laudato si’
by Christopher White
ROME – Jeffrey Sachs (director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University) – one of the world’s best-known economists – is also arguably one of the world’s biggest cheerleaders of Pope Francis and believes him to be the most important moral leader in the world today.
Sachs, who is not Catholic, has advised the Vatican on papal documents for over 25 years now…
Through his work with the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Sachs was a critical player in helping craft Laudato si’, Francis’s 2015 encyclical calling for greater care for creation, and today he’s a leading champion of the document on the global stage.

Sachs was recently in Rome for meetings of the Pontifical Academy and spoke with Crux on the third anniversary of the encyclical’s release, which he believes remains a clarion call for change from policymakers and powerbrokers all the way down to everyday Catholics in the pews…

Q: By some accounts, Laudato si’ is the most quoted papal document in history in just three years’ time. How do you account for that?

SACHS: It’s magnificent – absolutely magnificent. You read it and it’s breathtaking. I often say that I can assign it to first year graduate students in earth sciences, biology, theology, diplomacy, or political science. It’s so compellingly holistic that it can be read from all these crucial points of view, so therefore it inspires in its profundity, and it speaks to our urgent needs in a very direct way. The language is also very clear, and I think it brings the full emotional response to all of the knowledge that is deeply interwoven in the document…

Q: Pope Francis recently met with leading oil industry executives and urged them to reduce their use of fossil fuels. Do you believe they’ll take this to heart?

SACHS: I think it was a very significant gathering, and I was privileged to be part of it. These were oil industry executives who have accepted the basics of climate change. They know that this is real and that they have an important measure of responsibility…Pope Francis spoke to them extremely directly and said you have the responsibility of the Paris Climate Agreement and a lot of that involves leaving oil and gas under the ground because if we try to take all of the oil and the gas that we economically and profitably can, we will wreck the planet. Pope Francis was very direct, and I know that in such settings everyone listens in rapt attention, so I’m sure that it has a big effect…

Q: Much of Laudato si’ is engaged in calling on broad, structural changes in our world. How would you respond to the average Catholic who says, ‘Give me a tangible way in which I can live it out practically in my own life’?

SACHS: I hope that their parishes have solar panels on their roofs, and I hope that they’re speaking with their congressmen who very often take contributions from oil companies, and therefore, don’t speak about the urgency of climate change, and tell them that ‘we are your real constituency – not the oil company. You are to look after us, and we hear Pope Francis’s call and agree with it, and we want our representatives to represent the public, the common good, and future generations.’…https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2018/06/30/economist-sachs-acts-as-popes-cheerleader-on-laudato-si/

5 Jul: ABC: Why some Nationals want Tony Abbott to stay in the dark on the National Energy Guarantee
By political reporter Lucy Barbour
In his latest attempt to skewer the Federal Government’s energy policy, Tony Abbott has attached himself to the National Party’s push for government-owned and funded coal-fired power stations…
Nine years ago, Mr Abbott and the Nationals were in lock-step to ensure Malcolm Turnbull, then the opposition leader, lost his job because of his support for Labor’s emissions trading scheme…
Now the Nationals find themselves again embroiled in a pivotal energy debate involving Mr Turnbull and his prime ministerial predecessor, Mr Abbott.
This time, it is about the National Energy Guarantee, the Government’s push to tweak the market to ensure supply and reliability while also meeting our Paris climate commitments.

***But most (ANONYMOUS) Nationals say this time it is not about “rolling Turnbull” or “tearing apart the Government”.
In fact, a number of them would rather Mr Abbott retreat and quieten down.
They worry he has politicised an important policy debate by muddying it with questions about leadership

***As one (ANONYMOUS) Nationals MP told the ABC: “Tony probably wants it to be like the ETS. That is not where we’re coming from. He decided he’s onto a winner. But he doesn’t have our support. It’s really a waste of time.
“No-one wants to tear down the Government.”

Nationals’ plan to cut prices a free marketer’s nightmare
But their ideas come with a multi-billion-dollar price tag and a radical, government-ownership model.
Queensland National Keith Pitt, a former electrical engineer, was warning of an energy crisis long before it became a frequently used term in today’s politics.
He wrote the ‘working document’ Nationals leader Michael McCormack is discussing with the Prime Minister.
It proposes a $1 billion grant fund to encourage state governments and business to keep existing traditional power stations open by helping with modernisation.

Applications would be assessed by the Energy Security Board and the Infrastructure and Project Financing Agency, which falls under Nationals leader Michael McCormack’s infrastructure portfolio.
There would need to be proof that keeping a plant open would help provide more electricity into the grid, thus lowering prices.
One example some Nationals have raised is the ageing Liddell power station in the New South Wales Hunter Valley…

But the bigger prize Nationals have their hopes hung up on is a $4 billion equity fund, which would see the Government able to build new coal-fired power stations, off budget.
It would operate in a similar vein to the National Broadband Network and the Inland Rail project. The Government would rely on the coal plant making enough money down the track to cover the overall cost.
But the idea of a government building and owning a coal-fired power station, and intervening in the market, would horrify free-market liberals and ***respected economists…

FULL TEXT of two pieces from The Australian (behind paywall) in the comments section, read both:

Catallaxy Fils: Monday Forum: July 2, 2018
FROM COMMENTS:
OldOzzie #2754362
Tony Abbott bells the cat: why are we still in global climate pact? – Graham Lloyd
There is a core truth in Tony Abbott’s incendiary climate change speech that is sure to infuriate polite society…ETC

(SCROLL DOWN)
OldOzzie #2754442
Editorial, The Australian: Reliable and affordable power must be the priority…ETC

(SCROLL DOWN)
Old School Conservative #2754501
An opinion piece in The Oz supporting Mr Abbott’s call to leave the Paris Agreement is accompanied by a picture.
It shows clouds of steam rising from one chimney and is captioned “Emissions from a stack at the coal-fired Morgantown Generating Station in Newburg, Maryland.”
A few comments have raised the error but no changes have been made.
Ignorance or deliberate falsification?http://catallaxyfiles.com/2018/07/02/monday-forum-july-2-2018/comment-page-7/

jo had a thread in 2013 which involved the letters to the Editor of one Chris Roylance, Paddington, Qld:

17 Oct 2013: Jonova: Alarmists losing so badly they are scared of letters to editors
LETTER EXCERPT:
Ignoring every credible scientific organisation on Earth and the extreme weather events that they say are linked to anthropogenic global warming in favour of nit-picking pedantry over the minutiae of climate modelling that can never be 100 per cent correct is idiocy, especially when the only thing humanity has to lose from reducing emissions is money.
Chris Roylance, Paddington, Qld
—
PS: Dear Chris, since it’s “only money”, can you give me yours? – Johttps://www.google.com.au/search?q=%22chris+roylance%22&ei=F4k9W_zrLsGw0ATz5LM4&start=10&sa=N&biw=1366&bih=628

Michael Mann re-tweeted Peter Hannam 4h ago:

TWEET: Peter Hannam: How’d this letter get through @australian filter?
(CLICK ON CIRCLED LETTER TO SEE IT IS WRITTEN BY Chris Roylance, Paddington, Qld – SMEARING TONY ABBOTT AND QUOTING FANTASY LOWY INSTITUTE POLL CLAIMING 84 PERCENT OF AUSTRALIANS SAY THE GOVT SHOULD FOCUS ON RENEWABLES, EVEN IF THIS MEANS WE MAY NEED TO INVEST MORE IN INFRASTRUCTURE TO MAKE THE SYSTEM MORE RELIABLE”.)
4 Jul 2018https://twitter.com/p_hannam/status/1014643010796060672

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez got a mere 15,000 votes in the New York House Democratic primary, in a district with 700,000 people, just 4,000 more than her Democratic opponent.

however, not only is the FakeNewsMSM already calling her a “rock star” a la Obama -

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Emerges as a Political Star
New York Times – 27 Jun 2018
Ms. Ocasio-Cortez has been a waitress, a community activist and a campaign organizer for Bernie Sanders. Now she is a political ***rock star…

she is in great demand for MSM coverage (all of which will be positive, no doubt):

Ocasio-Cortez buried under more than 1000 media requests after primary win
The Hill · 1 day ago

***and she already has the approval of the great Michael Mann:

3 Jul: New Republic: Can Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Save the Planet?
Democrats lack an organized plan to stop global warming. Climate scientists say the newcomer has the beginnings of a good one.
By Emily Atkin
Ocasio-Cortez told HuffPost: “We must again invest in the development, manufacturing, deployment, and distribution of energy, but this time green energy.”…
These positions have earned Ocasio-Cortez significant positive press…

HuffPost called her “The Leading Democrat On Climate Change;” Vice called her “the Climate Change Hardliner the Planet Needs.” But those stories also note the political obstacles in Ocasio-Cortez’s way. There’s the climate-denying Republican Party, of course, but there are also Democrats, who have largely ignored climate change this election season and lack an organized plan to tackle it. How can a plan like Ocasio-Cortez’s see the light of day when her own party seems likely to bury it?…

If and when Democrats do decide to mobilize on global warming, climate scientists tell me their plan should look at least something like Ocasio-Cortez’s. “A plan of the magnitude and pace proposed by Ms. Ocasio-Cortez would be a critically important step in the right direction, albeit long overdue,” said Jennifer Francis, a research professor at Rutgers University’s Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences.

***Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State, agreed. “This is just the sort of audacious and bold thinking we will need if we are going to avert a climate crisis,” he said…

Kevin Trenberth, a distinguished senior climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, said he believed a gradually implemented carbon tax would be the only way to garner support for the plan…

Figuring most people involved in public discourse are relatively bright (dangerous, I know), it is impossible to escape the conclusion that there’s ideology hidden behind anthropogenic global warming for which AGW is just a very convenient blind. The hidden ideology is the VIP. Neither ‘science’ nor the scientific method are important per se. They are part of the veil to give activist’s and manipulators the power of pseudoscientific argument to cover their subversive intentions.

Two ideologies are at play. The first as revealed by that original UN paper, (when revealed, dismissed as just a UN draft) that formulated the stripping of huge funds (now a fact, revealed $100B/year – as it was in that ‘draft’) supposed to be paid by that successful, despised ‘Western Civilisation’, or Western nations, to the UN to distribute to third world countries but more likely to be used in any way the UN rabble sees fit. It was always the most efficient way of subverting the progressive West back to second world status and under UN control. It left Russia, China, India and the third world etc to their own devices, achieving control without a shot being fired. Meanwhile, our schools and institutions have been used to subvert Democracy, now judged by youth to be inferior to other means of government and to develop excuses to remove our Western freedoms, individualism being deleted for collectivism and national division.

Secondly,in Australia, politicians have a inane belief in renewable energy, even as it totally fails on a national scale. Tunnel vision in our elites, media and leading politicians, has removed the prime principle behind the raison d’etre for our parliament, the wellbeing of our people, transposing a ‘save the world first’ argument. No longer is the health and well being of our people and society the basic principle for governance.

We are the only nation in which governments are actually subjecting the people to a system of energy supply it knows doesn’t and cannot work for the demands a modern society places on it, knows and accepts its energy pricing will continue to rise, that people will increasingly be unable to afford it, that our standard of living must fall dramatically and that people will die.

The Paris Agreement is voluntary, but our Foreign Minister says it will be kept to the letter, even as the rest of the world, including the unsavoury, undemocratic and source of all this stuff, the EU ignores such inconveniences. Our Prime Minister and Energy Minister now mean to continue this attack on our people by the NEG, shown today to acknowledge continued price increases inflicted on the nation (today’s ‘The Outsiders’ guest). Our major companies are to be forced to supply their own backup power in a business with which they have no expertise and face up to $100m fines if they don’t meet emission control standards.

This is ideologically driven, destructive stuff coming from all our Parliaments. By the laws and actions coming out of our Parliaments, this country is being driven into the dirt, even as the ideologues see no other nation in the world as extremist as ‘we’ are. Our politicians know the biggest emitters of CO2 in the world – China, India, Russia and the USA suffer no limitations on what they do at all ie they are not going to ignore their people in the way Australian politicians are doing. What is happening here, as we obediently look on, is the destruction of this nation as we know it. These politicians, from all sides of the ledger, seem trapped in a time warp with a total loss of sense for what they are doing. Or are they so petrified over just how stupid they have been that they feel there is no way out, no way to reverse the lunacy they have been responsible for putting in place, no way to explain the damage they have done, the costs and losses they have inflicted, all as a result of their subserviance (and ambitions) to international bodies. So they simply push on to avoid retribution and the destruction of their reputations history will place on them. Amazing!